Great care must be taken to only change the variable being measured.ġ)Comparing a stereo amp to dual-mono single-ended is very different than comparing a stereo amp to dual-mono balanced. Second, I am sure you realize it is difficult to compare different architectures in evaluating this type of a parameter. A couple of thoughts: first, I point out what I am sure you realize, dual mono is not differential they are completely different things. I know many SS DACs sound a lot better using the balanced out than the single ended output.Jock, thanks for the insightful post. So I don't think its too much of a stretch to think that a balanced DAC in a tube DAC would give the same results. If the mono amps are matched then almost without fail, they will give more soundstage and a musicality to a system than a stereo amp. But these days parts are better and more matched.Īs an example - I equate this to a stereo amp and mono amps. So up to say the last 10 years, a single ended circuit almost always sounded more musical to me than a balanced one. The problem is that to perfectly match the balanced circuit is very very expensive / impossible to achieve. I've read and experienced by listening, that a properly designed and perfectly matched balanced circuit is better than a single ended one. The balanced vs unbalanced discussion is just one example of many that never end with a resolution and the topics are not complicated. Rather than saying, oh Paul I see your point good catch or saying this is what I think you missed, you will go to your regular arsenal of illogical circularity, personal attacks, or retreat. So here is the difference regarding conversations I have with you versus virtually every other forum member I interact with: Regardless of these points you proceed to argue the opposite. On the other hand I am not aware of anyone who disputes that summators being present (with no CMNR required) yields a net loss in SQ. Regardless of what approach is taken the worst outcome would be to drop a leg and reduce amplitude but thats it.
You seem to think that a differential chip output must be degraded to become single ended. If you start with the assumption that CMNR is not relevant (i.e., cable runs are short) which was stated clearly by the original poster the existence of the summator in the balanced system is a net negative relative to an unbalanced system. I am pointing out what I consider to be the significant flaw in your reasoning. So now I ask a question, can you explain what is incorrect about the following? On top of that, the Bal Dac runs a differential summator circuit that eliminates/cancels digital noise." the Bal Dac has Dual mono DSD implementation, so the signal sources start as Bal and SE is THIS case, is the compromise, as it demand a conversion, unlike with analog sources (normally SE starts with the advantage). noise floor, soundstage, etc.) to the Lampi SE DAC in a SE system." "If the cable runs are short, I can't come up with a logical reason why the Lampi balanced DAC in a balanced system would sound superior (i.e. My answer: I am talking about audio balanced versus unbalanced circuits generally and the relative impact of dac chip output on these circuits. Also are you talking about the Dac or the 211 amps, or both together?Ok good Norman lets just answer simple direct questions with simple direct answers. Are you arguing with yourself? Cant be with me as I repeat, i made no such claim.
0 kommentar(er)
